Corporate Governance,Ethics, and the Backdating of Stock Options

Backdating of stock options is an example of an agency problem. It has emerged despite all the measures (i.e., new regulations and additional corporate governance mechanisms) aimed at addressing such problems? Beyond such negative controlling measures, a more positive empowering approach based on ethics may also be necessary. What ethical measures need to be taken to address the agency problem? What values and norms should guide the board of directors in protecting the shareholders’ interests? To examine these issues, we first discuss the role values and norms can play with respect to underlying corporate governance and the proper role of directors, such as transparency, accountability, integrity (which is reflected in proper mechanisms of checks and balances), and public responsibility. Second, we discuss various stakeholder approaches (e.g., government, directors, managers, and shareholders) by which conflicts of interest (i.e., the agency problem) can be addressed. Third, we assess the practice of backdating stock options, as an illustration of the agency problem, in terms of whether the practice is legally acceptable or ethically justifiable. Fourth, we proceed to an analysis of good corporate governance practice involving backdating options based on a series of ethical standards including: (1) trustworthiness; (2) utilitarianism; (3) justice; and (4) Kantianism. We conclude that while executive compensation schemes (e.g., stock options) were originally intended to help remedy the agency problem by tying together the interests of the executives and shareholders, these schemes may have actually become “part of the problem,” and that the solution ultimately depends upon whether directors and executives accept that all of their actions must be based on a set of core ethical values.     

Corporate Governance Reform and CEO Compensation: Intended and Unintended Consequences

Recent scandals allegedly linked to CEO compensation have brought executive compensation and perquisites to the forefront of debate about constraining executive compensation and reforming the associated corporate governance structure. We briefly describe the structure of executive compensation, and the agency theory framework that has commonly been used to conceptualize executives acting on behalf of shareholders. We detail some criticisms of executive compensation and associated ethical issues, and then discuss what previous research suggests are likely intended and unintended consequences of some widely proposed executive compensation reforms. We explicitly discuss the following recommendations for reform: require greater independence of compensation committees, require executives to hold equity in the corporation, require greater disclosure of executive compensation, increase institutional investor involvement in corporate governance (including executive compensation), and require firms to expense stock options on their income statements. We provide a brief summary discussion of ethical issues related to executive compensation, and describe possible future research.     

Compensating Outside Directors with Stock: The Impact on Non-Primary Stakeholders

Two obvious trends in corporate governance include broadening board accountability beyond shareholders’ interests and paying outside directors with equity compensation (stock and stock options). By integrating common agency and instrumental stakeholder theories, we examine the effect of stock compensation on secondary stakeholders and a firm’s participation in social issues, two areas where interests are less aligned with shareholder value. Consistent with our predictions, we found that while stock compensation may be an effective way to align directors’ goals to those of shareholders, it has adverse effects on important non-shareholder constituencies in the company’s operating environment.     

Are Stock Options Grants to CEOs of Stagnant Firms Fair and Justified?

Prior research has examined several ethical questions related to executive compensation. The issues that have received most attention are whether executives’ pay is fair and justified by performance. Since more recent studies show that stock options grants constitute the single largest component in executive compensation, we examine the relations of these grants to economic determinants and corporate governance for firms in the stagnant stage of their lifecycle. We find that, on average, stock options grants comprise a significant portion of annual CEO compensation (26.4%) for stagnant firms. We also find that economic (corporate governance) factors explain less (or more) of the cross-sectional variation in stock options grants for stagnant firms than for growth firms. Furthermore, we document lower pay-performance sensitivity (i.e., weaker incentive alignment) and no improvement in future firm performance from past stock options grants to CEOs of stagnant firms. In particular, our study provides empirical evidence on some inefficiencies associated with stock options grants to CEOs of low potential (stagnant) firms, a long-standing concern of business ethics researchers (Moriarty, 2005; Nichols and Subramaniam, 2001; Perel, 2003). Our results also provide support for the corporate governance reforms discussed in Matsumura and Shin (2005), especially those proposed provisions that curtail the power of CEOs in the governance of firms.     

The Agency Problems Embedded in Firm’s Equity Investment

We find that agency problems are embedded in firm’s excess and abnormal equity investments that are mainly dictated by controlling shareholder’s motives and ethical choices manifested in ownership and board structure. The excess equity investment is gauged with respect to industry average. The abnormal equity investment is specifically referred to the number of nominal investment companies that are fully controlled by the controlling owners while subject to little governance. Our empirical evidences of 345 Taiwanese non-financial listed firms show that firm’s excess and abnormal equity investments are negatively correlated with controlling shareholder’s cash flow rights while are positively correlated with the control–cash flow deviation, and board affiliation. The results are supportive of the positive incentive hypothesis and the negative entrenchment hypothesis put forth by La Porta et al. (2002, Journal of Finance 57, 1147–1171) and Claessen et al. (2002, Journal of Finance 57, 2741–2742). The negative relation between equity investment and firm’s value further supports the agency postulation that corporate excess and abnormal equity investments represent a leeway for controlling shareholder to exploit wealth of minority shareholders. This study potentially contributes to the literature of business ethics by portraying an empirically testable linkage from controlling owner’s ethical choices to his actions and therefore firm’s value. Yin-Hua Yeh, Ph.D., is Professor and Director of the Graduate Institute of Finance at Fu-Jen Catholic University (FJU) in Taiwan. He is also the Director of the Center for Corporate Governance and Business Ethics at FJU. His main research and teaching areas are corporate governance, corporate finance, and merger and acquisition. Tsun-Siou Lee, Ph.D., is Professor of Finance at National Taiwan University. His main research and teaching areas are corporate governance, futures and options, and financial innovation. Pei-Gi Shu, Ph.D., is Professor of Business Administration at Fu-Jen Catholic University in Taiwan. He is also the Vice Dean of Management College at FJU. His main research and teaching areas are mutual funds and behavioral finance.     

Corporate Governance,Agility, and Survival

Abstract

Most corporate research has focused on (i) dimensions of governance that are relatively easy to measure (e.g., ownership structure, boards of directors, and executive compensation) and (ii) the role that governance arrangements play in mitigating agency costs. This paper takes an evolutionary perspective to corporate governance in which the concept of corporate agility, i.e., the ease with which firms adapt to changes in their respective environments, plays a prominent role. I argue that decentralization, which is understudied in the literature, promotes agility and predict that it is directly related to corporate performance and survival during periods of rapidly changing environments. The paper also discusses how some governance features that often are viewed through the lens of either mitigating or exacerbating agency costs are cast in a different light when their effects on corporate agility are considered.     

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act Will Change the Governance of Non Profit Organizations

As a public director of a NASDAQ stock exchange listed public corporation, I have seen how quickly the reforms in corporate governance imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act have changed procedures and policies in public corporations. In areas such as transparency of financial records and other financial matters including compensation of top executives and conflict of interest policies affecting both corporate boards of directors and employees of the corporation the reforms of this new federal law have quickly changed corporate practices in many corporations. Many persons who have studied this new law believe that these changes will benefit the public, shareholders, employees, and other stakeholders in the modern corporation by increasing the reputation of these organizations for integrity and transparency. Stock exchanges such as NASDAQ and the New York Stock Exchange now require all listed companies to have (after a transition time) a majority of independent directors on their boards of directors. Only independent directors may serve on the audit, nominating and compensation committees of boards in most cases. Some exceptions are made to these rules for foreign and domestic issues of companies where a majority of the voting power is held by one person. According to Morrison & Foster LLP, Corporate Board Advisory March , 2004, NASDAQ requires that the board of directors of a listed company determine that an independent director does not have a relationship that would “interfere with the exercise of independent judgment” in carrying out the responsibilities of a director. Donald Grunewald served as President of Mercy College from 1972 to 1984. He has served as a member of the board of trustees of several colleges and proprietary educational institutions and on the boards of other charitable institutions. Currently he is a member of the Board of Directors of EVCI Career Colleges, Inc., a NASDAQ listed corporation.     

Board independence, firm performance and ownership concentration: Evidence from Chile

What determines the composition of companies' boards in the context of high ownership concentration? Are independent directors important as an internal governance mechanism in companies with high ownership concentration? Do markets favor companies whose controlling shareholders use voting rights to elect professional directors?Using a four-year, 160-company panel data, and controlling for endogeneity, this paper addresses these three related questions, finding that an increase in the proportion of outside directors affects company value. The paper also finds that companies that present more exacerbated agency conflicts tend to incorporate professional directors to the boards, in an effort to improve corporate governance and ameliorate the agency problem.     

An evaluation of corporate governance evaluation, governance index (CGI NK ) and performance: Evidence from Chinese listed companies in 2003

In the present paper, based on samples of 2003, empirical analyses of Corporate Governance Index (CGI ^NK ) and its six dimensions of listed companies in China, the index of controlling shareholders’ behaviors, board governance index, top management governance index, information disclosure index, stakeholders’ governance index, and supervisors committee governance index, are carried out and the results show that CGI ^NK is positively associated with the return on assets (ROA), net assets per share (NAPS), earnings per share (EPS), operating cash flow per share (OCFPS), total assets turnover (TAV), rate of total assets growth (ITA) and Z-score. These indicate that good corporate governance mechanisms improve profitability, stock expansion ability, operating efficiency, growth and development potential, as well as financial flexibility and safety of listed companies. Corporate governance mechanisms of controlling shareholders, board of directors, top management, information disclosure, stakeholders and supervisors committee are largely responsible for decision-making and decision-execution mechanisms, and furthermore, they have direct and profound effects on the performance and value of listed companies. Translated from Zhongguo Gongye Jingji 中国工业经济 (China Industrial Economy), 2006, (4): 98–107     

股权分置改革对上市公司治理优化的影响研究

股权分置的制度缺陷导致了上市公司治理缺乏共同的利益基础,扭曲了资本市场发挥作用的机理。股权分置改革有利于上市公司逐步形成共同的治理基础。从股权分置改革对上市公司治理优化的影响关系框架可以看出,指出股权分置改革通过上市公司股东行为、董事会作用及经营者激励约束机制等内部治理因素和资本市场定价机制、控制权市场并购重组机制及监督约束机制等外部治理因素影响着上市公司整体治理的优化,从而使后股权分置时代促进上市公司治理优化。     

Can business ethics enhance corporate governance? Evidence from a survey of UK insurance executives

This paper seeks to explore the implementation of corporate ethical culture and policies as an adjunct to formal forms of corporate governance. The insurance industry utilises a variety of external governance structures, but is almost unique in that stock companies (which are exposed to an external market for corporate control) and mutual companies (which are owned by a subset of their customers) are in active competition. A questionnaire survey of senior executives in U.K. insurance companies was undertaken to explore the implementation of ethical policies and codes, to investigate ethical attitudes, and to analyze the extent to which these policies and attitudes varied among companies. The results suggest that ethical policies have a higher profile and ethical attitudes and behaviour are more positive in mutual as opposed to stock insurance companies. These findings support the contention that a strong corporate ethical culture may be utilised to enhance formal corporate governance instruments. Stephen Diacon and Christine Ennew both work in the School of Management and Finance at the University of Nottingham, United Kingdom. Dr. Diacon is Senior Lecturer in Insurance Studies and Director of the University of Nottingham Insurance Centre. Dr. Ennew is Reader in Marketing and Associate Editor of International Journal of Bank Marketing.     

Stock Option Repricing: Heads I Win, Tails You Lose

Recent scandals at Enron, WorldCom and Global Crossing have put the ethical spotlight on corporate malfeasance as never before. However, these are the situations in which management knew that they made the wrong choice. As professor Joseph Badaracco of Harvard Business School points out, the real ethical dilemmas arise when people must choose between right and right — where both choices can be justified, yet one must be chosen over the other. Whether or not to reprice stock options represents one such ethical dilemma. Repricing can help exodus of talented employees and motivate them to improve firm performance. However, it alienates shareholders and other workers of the company who are left unprotected from the adverse economic consequences of a stock price decline.In this paper we examine the ethics and the economics of stock option repricing. We find that repricing runs counter to two key tenets of business ethics — distributive justice and ordinary decency. To examine the economics of repricing, we draw upon agency theory to identify situations where repricing has the potential to benefit shareholders. However, a survey of empirical research reveals that these benefits do not translate into reality. Repricing does not improve employee retention or firm performance. In addition, managers benefit by opportunistically timing the repricing. Due to weaknesses in corporate governance such as lack of independence and conflicts of interest, the current repricing practice seems to be at odds with the objective of shareholder wealth maximization, and at a more fundamental level, a violation of board's fiduciary duty to shareholders. We offer suggestions that mitigate the ethically undesirable effects of repricing in the wider context of prevailing corporate governance and regulatory environment. We believe that these suggestions, if properly implemented, can transform repricing from a greed-inspired evil to a valuable compensation tool to retain employees, boost their morale, and enhance stockholder wealth.     

Determinants of related-party transactions: Evidence from China’s listed companies during 2002–2006

This study attempts to shed light on the relationship between related-party (RP) transactions and internal governance factors of China’s listed companies. An analysis of a sample of 69 049 RP transactions during 2002–2006 reveals strong evidence that the likelihood of RP transactions is higher for companies with high concentration of ownership, but lower for companies with strong bargaining power of the second and third largest shareholders. There is also clear evidence showing that large compensation for outside directors is associated with greater size of RP transactions, whereas increased average compensation for the three top executives tends to decrease the number of RP transactions. Our results also reveal that the pluralism arraignment, i.e. the same person holding both positions of the board chairman and the chief executive, increases the size of RP transactions significantly. This finding suggests that pluralism reduces the balance of power in corporate governance.      

Board Team Leadership Revisited: A Conceptual Model of Shared Leadership in the Boardroom

In the slipstream of several large-scale corporate scandals, the board of directors has gained a pivotal position in the corporate governance debate. However, due to an overreliance on particular methodological (i.e. input–output studies) and theoretical (i.e. agency theory) research fortresses in past board research, academic knowledge concerning how this important governance mechanism actually operates and functions remains relatively limited. This theoretical paper aims to contribute to the promising stream of research which focuses on behavioural perspectives and processes within the corporate board, by delving into one of the research areas perhaps plagued most by these predominant approaches: board leadership. In adopting a team perspective on the board of directors our study goes beyond traditional board leadership research, which has turned a blind eye on actual leadership dynamics, by examining leadership processes and behaviours inside the board team. Specifically, we develop a conceptual framework addressing a novel and ethical approach to team leadership within the board, i.e. shared leadership, which has previously been demonstrated to result in performance benefits in various other team settings.     

公司治理与企业业绩关系研究文献综述

在美国金融危机的冲击下,公司治理机制问题已成为目前国内外学术界共同面对的课题。总体上看,国际性的研究表明,当大股东的控制权高于他对现金流所拥有的权利时,公司的价值会减少,即大股东在取得控制权后,更多的是以牺牲公司利益的方式获得私人利益。我国学者研究发现,多元化股东、外部董事比例和高管激励是公司治理最重要的三个因素,是影响公司绩效最为显著的变量。但也有研究认为,我国上市公司的董事会行为是低效率的。从国内国外两个方面的文献综述可以看出,对公司治理与企业业绩的研究主要集中在公司的内部治理结构方面,由于研究的角度与变量选取的不同,其研究结果差异较大。但是,就其研究过程来讲,对于我国这样的新兴市场的建设与发展是具有重大影响意义的。     

CEO任期、董事会治理与绩效强制变更敏感性

本文以2010-2014年我国沪深A股主板上市公司以及在此期间的1341例CEO变更事件为初始研究样本,采用Logit模型和OLS模型研究CEO任期对公司绩效与CEO强制变更敏感性的影响,并从董事会治理视角,进一步说明敏感性发生变化的原因。研究发现,任期是识别CEO能力的重要标识,随着CEO任期逐渐延长,绩效与CEO强制变更的敏感性、以及董事会的监督力度均显著降低,董事会治理机制能够反映股东监督CEO并获取相关信息的需求。     

The influence of firm and executive characteristics on performance-vested stock option grants

Motivated by the considerable changes over the last two decades in the form and composition of executive remuneration schemes and the increasing use of performance-vested stock options (PVSOs), this study examines the determinants of PVSO grants. Using data on 4193 executive-year observations of 1373 executive directors in 243 FTSE 350 non-financial companies from 1999 to 2004, I examine the factors that influence PVSO grants at both the firm and the executive level. While controlling for unobservable industry, firm, and executive level fixed effects, the evidence shows that the PVSO grants awarded to individual executives are associated with observable features of corporate governance and indicators of managerial power. More specifically, the results support the following statements: (1) good corporate governance structures facilitate the use of PVSO plans; (2) the proportion of PVSO grants in the total compensation package is smaller for top mangers with more controlling power; (3) PVSO plans are less frequently used to compensate managers who are approaching their retirement and/or have a large equity stake in the firm; (4) relative to non-CEO executives, CEOs are more likely to be rewarded with PVSOs.     

Is there Informational Value in Corporate Giving?

In this article, we propose that giving in cash and non-cash (in-kind) differ in their relation with the giving firm’s future corporate financial performance (CFP) and only cash giving is associated with future CFP. Using a novel dataset from ASSET4 that differentiates corporate giving over a sample period of 2002–2012, we examine three competing hypotheses: (1) agency cost hypothesis that cash giving reflects agency cost and destroys value for shareholders, (2) investment hypothesis that cash giving is an investment by management that aims for better future return, and (3) information hypothesis that cash giving has informational value to shareholders as cash is a critical resource at a firm and giving is a decision by managers who are insiders. We find that indeed, only cash giving is positively associated with future CFP and firm value, measured by Fama–French five-factor abnormal risk-adjusted stock returns, future return on assets, and Tobin’s Q. In addition, we find that the positive association exists only between excess, i.e., unexpected, but not expected cash giving and future CFP. Our empirical findings support the information hypothesis, but neither the agency hypothesis nor the investment hypothesis, and are robust to a number of endogeneity tests, including orthogonalized cash giving, instrumental variable regression using geography-based instruments, and propensity score matching. Furthermore, we show that the positive association between future CFP and unexpected cash giving is only pronounced at firms with good governance and relatively higher sales growth where agency problems are less likely, and at firms with no alternative mechanisms to demonstrate the strength of cash flow. Additionally, we do not find evidence that suggests in-kind giving to possess any informational value.     

Insiders' personal stock donations from the lens of stakeholder,stewardship and agency theories

This paper studies the relationship between personal stock donation by top executives and board of directors (insiders) of publicly traded corporations and their personal tax, shareholders' returns, and social responsibility. The study finds evidence that the timing of stock donations is driven by personal tax gain. The study further shows, comparing stock gift corporations relative to their non‐stock gift cohorts, that personal stock gifts are associated with lower short‐term and long‐term stock returns to shareholders. This implies that stock donation driven by insiders' personal gain adversely affects shareholder wealth. However, the likelihood and intensity of insiders to make personal stock donation is reduced when firms have strong corporate social responsibility (CSR). Agency theory explains insiders' opportunistic behavior, stakeholder theory is also supported by evidence that stock donation is negatively related to CSR, and stewardship theory offers a different view to explain the rationale behind insiders' stock donation and shareholders' reactions to stock gifts.     

Rules of the game: whose value is served when the board fires the owners?

How does a board of directors decide what is right? The contest over this question is frequently framed as a debate between shareholder value and stakeholder rights, between a utilitarian view of the ethics of corporate governance and a deontological one. This paper uses a case study with special circumstances that allows us to examine in an unusually clear way the conflict between shareholder value and other bases on which a board can act. In the autumn of 2010, the board of Liverpool Football Club sold the company to another investing group against the explicit wishes of the owners. The peculiar circumstances of this case provide insight into the conflict between ethical approaches to board decisions, allowing us to see certain issues more clearly than we can in listed corporations with many shareholders. What the analysis suggests is that the board saw more than one type of utility on which to base its ethical decision, and that one version resonated with perceived duties to stakeholders. This alignment of outcomes of strategic value with duties contrasted with the utility of shareholder value. While there are reasons to be cautious in generalizing, the case further suggests reasons why boards may reject shareholder value, in opposition to mainstream notions of corporate governance, without rejecting utility as a base of their decisions. Further, the partial alignment of duty and utility facilitates a pragmatic decision rather than one based on a priori claims.